Search for: "In Interest of T. S. III"
Results 181 - 200
of 6,788
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Feb 2022, 12:32 am
In the present case (T 1517/17, consolidated with T 2719/19), the patent proprietor filed an appeal to the interlocutory decision of the opposition division revoking its patent. [read post]
29 May 2007, 2:49 am
Least you think that I’m just an old duffer who can’t properly judge a “children’s movie” — even my daughter wanted to walk out 1/2 through the movie. [read post]
23 Oct 2021, 1:38 am
It’s why we’re developing new ways to spot cartels, and why we take an interest in new types of cartel, as well as more familiar ones.Buyer cartels (ii)In the last few years, for instance, we’ve dealt with several cartels that manipulated industry reference prices, rather than fixing final prices. [read post]
6 Apr 2011, 12:22 pm
Simpson III, who dropped an interesting footnote on this topic in his Feb. 9, 2011, opinion denying Sypher's motion for extension of time, motion for new trial, motion for Rule 11 sanctions and other evidentiary motions. [read post]
11 Nov 2013, 5:01 pm
This opposition appeal contains quite a lot of interesting material. [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 4:50 am
Since this wasn't litigated in the lower courts, there's not a record on it. [read post]
11 Feb 2014, 1:02 pm
Marshall, 131 S. [read post]
5 Mar 2018, 1:55 pm
The EPO’s representation of these results is interesting. [read post]
16 May 2016, 12:02 pm
Devata, Robert T. [read post]
8 Sep 2015, 4:03 am
Nonetheless, the rejection under Conte Bros. was still appropriate because the plaintiff didn’t come within the zone of interests addressed by the Lanham Act. [read post]
1 Nov 2007, 2:06 pm
He orders a hearing but doesn't say he'll take up the motion to confirm. [read post]
19 Nov 2007, 5:19 am
Part B: Other Things That You Must Learn in CollegeIn addition to the choice of majors, here's what you ideally shouldn't get out of undergrad without knowing:A basic consumer's understanding of statistics and probability. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 12:25 pm
But this essay argues that the most plausible explanation for the Court’s holding is that Congress lacks the power to entitle persons to damage relief if they have not suffered an Article III injury in fact. [read post]
24 Jun 2022, 4:10 am
iii) If so, was that belief reasonable? [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 2:58 pm
That said, Matt also argued that the Krass opinion’s “national interest” criterion for assessing possible interventions was too malleable, and doesn’t actually provide meaningful constraints on presidential action. [read post]
19 Oct 2010, 8:03 pm
Adam Serwer has a very interesting response to my post a few days back about charging KSM and friends in both Article III courts and military commissions. [read post]
11 Sep 2021, 8:16 am
Behind the scenes, though, beer wasn’t the only thing brewing. [read post]
19 Mar 2008, 7:00 am
There are a lot of interesting arguments that you should check out for yourself. [read post]
9 Feb 2012, 12:36 pm
Kadner, T. [read post]
6 Feb 2024, 8:31 am
[T]he interest in criminal accountability, held by both the public and the Executive Branch, outweighs the potential risks of chilling Presidential action and permitting vexatious litigation.... [read post]
